The second advertisement in Microsoft's Laptop Hunters advertisements series …

Share this story

Less than two weeks ago, Microsoft kicked off the latest installment of its Windows Brand Campaign with a series it dubbed Laptop Hunters. We saw how Lauren chose a PC over a Mac because it better fit her requirements, which included a $1,000 budget. The second advertisement introduces us to Giampaolo, who has a budget of under $1,500 and wants a laptop that has portability, battery life, and power. Giampaolo goes shopping in a store selling both PCs and Macs, and of course, Apple can't deliver: "Let's go check out the Macs. This is so sexy, but Macs to me are about aesthetics more than they are about the computing power. I don't want to pay for the brand, I want to pay for the computer." I've embedded the video below, but if you want a better quality one, head over to Microsoft.com/Windows (Silverlight required).

The ad ends with Giampaolo telling us "I'm a PC, because I'm really picky." It's great to see that after all these years of being attacked by Apple's marketing team, Microsoft has finally launched a solid counterattack. It's obvious by the reaction of those on the Internet that the ads have really struck a golden chord. The complains about the ads are not so much that Microsoft is making things up, but that it is being too aggressive. After years of sitting on its hands, I'm perfectly fine with a vicious approach. I'm not quite sure what the next ad will talk about. It will likely be under $2,000, and I guess Microsoft can imply that "Macs aren't good for gaming." That said though, this chapter of ads can't really go on forever without getting repetitive, so I'm eager to see what the campaign will bring next.

Share this story

123 Reader Comments

That said though, this chapter of ads can't really go on forever without getting repetitive, so I'm eager to see what the campaign will bring next.

Seeing how long the "I'm a Mac, and I'm a PC" ads went on, I think Microsoft can and should milk this round of ads for all they can. It's about time they reminded people that Apple is just another evil empire.

How is this helping HP sell their VooDoo series of PCs? Or Dell's XPS Studios?

If these ads are successful at taking sales away from Apple, they will also reduce sales of premium PCs. If they aren't successful at taking sales away from Apple, it will just reinforce the meme that "If you can't afford Apple, buy a PC".

Funny how the big bad Microsoft is so afraid to actually use the names of THEIR products in their own commercials. Instead they rely on selling other people products (HP) and on causing a controversy with a competitor with much smaller marketshare to gain notoriety for their ads.

The commercials are certainly aggressive, but they aren't internally consistent. The guy wants portability, so he picks a 7.8lb 16.4" laptop with 3 hours (stated, probably not actual) of battery life? Yeah, that's portable...

Also its a big HP ad too, I cant recall seeing one non-HP laptop (that isn't an Apple) in these commercials.

For me, this series just reaffirms Apple's brilliance when it comes to marketing.

Small-time computer manufacturer releases ad after ad attacking its largest sort-of competitor. The real damage is done not to Microsoft, of course, but to PC manufacturers; Apple continues to target Windows, Windows, Windows in its ads, but is really going after the PC makers when it comes to sales.

Of course, after years of being stung, Microsoft is going after the mosquito with everything they've got. They're pushing other people's products now — with their OS installed, sure, but ultimately these are ads for Windows PCs, something Microsoft doesn't make.

And so now, every time people see a Windows ad, they're reminded that Macs are a legitimate alternative.

That said though, this chapter of ads can't really go on forever without getting repetitive, so I'm eager to see what the campaign will bring next.

Seeing how long the "I'm a Mac, and I'm a PC" ads went on, I think Microsoft can and should milk this round of ads for all they can. It's about time they reminded people that Apple is just another evil empire.

It's also reminding people that Apple is a manufacturer on par with HP, despite having 1/3 the marketshare.

Not a good thing to do, honestly, because this essentially becomes a free commercial FOR Apple, for everyone who doesn't want an 8 pound 16" 3 hour laptop.

Like most of the tech analysts on the web, people are missing out on the main point. Microsoft doesn't have to hype Windows specifically, because it's hyping Microsoft. Microsoft = PC, in the average consumer's mind. All they have to do is convince people that they want a PC, regardless of who makes it, and they're getting Microsoft...and they know it.

This series of ads isn't about Windows vs. OSX, it's about PC vs. Mac, and Microsoft is the PC, and everyone knows it. Notice how no one was "confused" or "upset" about this concept when Apple was doing it. John Hodgeman's PC wasn't HP or Dell, it was Microsoft. All of a sudden the message is turned, and Mac folks are indignant that Microsoft is settling talking about PCs? Who's being disingenous now?

The next round in the marketing campaign has got to be about Windows 7, right? What else is there as a conclusion? It's around the corner, there has to be a big marketing push to lead into the sales cycle, and this is probably the final step in setting up that round of Win7-centric messaging, which people will be more likely to remember now. I wouldn't be shocked if one of our shoppers soon goes out looking for a PC they "know will run Windows 7".

It is kinda funny how people's feathers are getting all ruffled at this. I agree with Lemurs, Microsoft = PC and this is very much a PC v. Mac campaign. They want to show the public that there are options when you choose a PC. Notice how they only show one or maybe two Macs and then several rows of PCs. Besides, why shouldn't Microsoft push PC makers hardware in the commercial? Showing you pictures of the software doesn't do you much good if you aren't technically inclined.

As far as being "aggressive" is concerned I say go for it. This is what advertisers do to get your money. They have to get your attention before you will give the product any thought. Sure they could be more subtle but why bother. This is driving the message home.

The guy in the ad says he wants tp buy a laptop for portability, battery life and power. He buys an 8lbs brick, with a 2 hour battery life and less power than a 2006 MacBook (his machine has 533mhz RAM for goodness sake).

Originally posted by Kanuck:And so now, every time people see a Windows ad, they're reminded that Macs are a legitimate alternative.

Just as the "I'm a Mac" ads reminded people that PC's are better.

That's the point. Apple holds 3 % market share, but 50 % mind share.

Do you mean that 50% of people are aware of Macs but the majority purposefully chooses not to purchase them? I don't understand how any mapping of mind-share>market-share can be presented in a positive light unless you can show a long term trend of reversal.

(It's possible that we're seeing the beginnings of this trend now, but the %s are still so small I'd venture to say it’s premature to diagnose as such.)

Originally posted by Lemurs:This series of ads isn't about Windows vs. OSX, it's about PC vs. Mac, and Microsoft is the PC, and everyone knows it. Notice how no one was "confused" or "upset" about this concept when Apple was doing it. John Hodgeman's PC wasn't HP or Dell, it was Microsoft. All of a sudden the message is turned, and Mac folks are indignant that Microsoft is settling talking about PCs? Who's being disingenous now?.

John Hodgman isn't HP or Dell, he's a composite of all of them. The reason that ads refer to Windows so much is because that is the user-facing part of the machine. I don't believe that means he's "Microsoft."

The funny part of this is that the ads talk about shopping for specific features that perhaps superficially fit the criteria but further analysis proves they don't. This has been the same for both commercials.

It's true Apple doesn't offer something for everyone in every price range, and its machines tend toward the higher end of the scale. But even the 13" entry MacBook for $999 is a great piece of hardware that will last for a long time, and con run Windows if someone wants to run Parallels, Fusion, Virtual Box, or even Boot Camp. You can certainly buy PCs that are cheaper than Macs, but they are not always easily comparable.

Originally posted by Kanuck:And so now, every time people see a Windows ad, they're reminded that Macs are a legitimate alternative.

Just as the "I'm a Mac" ads reminded people that PC's are better.

That's the point. Apple holds 3 % market share, but 50 % mind share.

Indeed. I was a little confused by that response to what I'd said — unless it was a mindless troll, in which case I guess it hit its target.

quote:

Originally posted by Martouf:It is kinda funny how people's feathers are getting all ruffled at this. I agree with Lemurs, Microsoft = PC and this is very much a PC v. Mac campaign.

Are people's feathers getting ruffled? I know a lot of people are emotionally attached to Apple, or Microsoft, or whatever, but I'm not. Hell, I'm an Apple user and I detest half the things Apple does — mostly because for my intents and purposes their products are significantly better, yet often cost more. My choices are to stay within their ecosystem and pay more, or pay less and suffer the inevitable incompatibility. (Of course, if there were a competing cohesive ecosystem this wouldn't be the case, so it's really just a matter of what they can get away with.)

I was just pointing out that Microsoft is legitimizing Apple by targeting them so heavily with their advertising. Now that they're slinging crap back and forth, it puts them on the same level in the eye of the consumer.

It would be like Coke putting out an ad targeting Pepsi. Their competitive advantage would disappear faster than New Coke did from the shelves.

I happen to own a 13-Inch MacBook, with a Intel Core 2 Duo clocked at 2ghz with a 1066mhz bus, two 1gb DDR3 RAM sticks also with a 1066mhz bus, and an nVidia GeForce 9200M. Not to mention Leopard running on top of it all. In a box that can nearly rival some netbooks in size, and which has five hours of battery life at times. For just over 1K.

I'm also surprised that I'm the first to point out the irony of including a promo image for the Adamo, a computer arguably marketed for its aesthetics and is more expensive than the competing MacBook Air, when the ad tries to claim that paying more for good aesthetics is a waste of money.

Both of these commercials run the risk of making Windows look like something you settle for. You go in the store, you want a Mac, but you settle for a PC, and it ends up being good enough. That's kind of the message of the Mac vs PC ads too. PCs are good enough, but Macs are better. These ads seem to be ceding the point. They're better, yes, and sure they cost a bit more an average. Do you want to settle or pay a bit more for quality? Do you shop at Walmart or The Gap?

I'm a long time Mac user from the early 90's so I've had enough time to brush that chip off my shoulder. But one thing that really is sad is this "selective retardation" Mac users have when understanding simple concepts. Rather than looking at the real problem (2 button mouse, mirror-glass screens, lack of product selection), they instead choose to bash everything in the world instead. For me the message in this latest set of ads is easy to relate to.

Problem: I needed two 15" notebooks. One for me (replacing my dead Black Macbook) and one for mom (upgrading her $400 15" Toshiba).

Solution (Mom): I want to move her to Mac but the CHEAPEST 15" is $2000?!?! 13" is too small and 17" is a whopping $2700 so I simply can't justify that much for an email/internet portal. $800 Dell. (No warranty because all my "crappy" Dells have lasted over 3yrs)

Clearly the problem isn't Microsoft, Dell or HP that is causing me to buy my mom a PC over Mac. It is the lack of Apple selection for "regular people". I know you're not supposed to point fingers at the mothership, but a lot more good would come from acting like Apple CONSUMERS rather than Apple Salesmen.

BTW. But just for kicks then let's pretend a PC lasts 18months then self-destructs. At $700 a pop then "Lauren" can keep buying a new PC every 18months for the next 6 years before she'd reach the price of a 17" Macbook Pro. Cry all you want, but to average users then a computer is a toold and spending within a budget matters a lot more than being trendy.

It really is bizarre watching these ads from MS that don't say anything whatsoever about an actual MS product. Couldn't squeeze in one single line about how great Windows is?

And the line about 'not paying for brand' cuts both ways: Apparently MS's ad agency thinks the brands "Microsoft" and "HP" are worthless.

This and the "not cool enough to buy a Mac" line, I suppose in both cases they're clearly aiming at a recession mindset. But, presuming this recession ends at some point, it could come back to bite them. They're both increasing Apple brand awareness, and not contesting the desirability of Apple's products. Strange.

John Hodgman isn't HP or Dell, he's a composite of all of them. The reason that ads refer to Windows so much is because that is the user-facing part of the machine. I don't believe that means he's "Microsoft."

I'm not sure Bill Gates gets that. From his public comments it seems pretty clear that he thinks Hodgman is playing him and the other guy is playing Jobs. I must say that I never actually made that connection when I first saw the ads. It was just a young, hip, gen-Xer and a portly business guy.

The people in the ads are supposed to be an anthropomorphic representation of the actual machine sitting in front of you. "Hello, I'm a Mac" "And, I'm a PC". They are "a" Mac and "a" PC. When Hodgman sneezes or falls over it's a slapstick way of portraying an actual computer going blue screen or crashing. When the Mac holds hands with a cute girl it's a way of portraying the Mac working with the friendly camera.

We Mac users aren't cool like "The Mac", but we sit in front of computers that *are* that cool. We don't make pie charts to show how fun our vacation was. We go in a computer store and say, what's the best computer for my needs, not I have two large, hook me up.

Originally posted by Kanuck:They're pushing other people's products now — with their OS installed, sure, but ultimately these are ads for Windows PCs, something Microsoft doesn't make.

Microsoft gets payed for every OEM computer that gets purchased if it had a MS OS installed on it. Since Microsoft doesn't make computers it's in their best interest to make sure that their partners are well represented.

So yes, they are pushing hardware that is "Not Apple", but since 90ish% of all prefabs that aren't Apple have Windows installed anyway, MS is staying true to representing the PC crowd.

I suspect MS next move is to point out the entertainment value of having a MS OS on your system. The step after that they will point out that new Vista customers will have an easy (and inexpensive) time upgrading to Windows 7 thanks to the Windows 7 Technology Guarantee Program.

Most Mac users I know buy the Mac for the OS, the nice software that comes with it (such as iLife), and because they are easy to use.

Yeah they have got the best styling in my opinion, but their integrated software wins it for me.Anything to do with music, photos, web, internet banking gets done on the Mac.

I do have 3 PCs in the house, 2 are on XP, 1 on RHEL 4.PCs are still fun for gaming.

It's irony that MS is trying to persuade people to get a PC becuase the hardware is better value for money.Maybe they should spend less money on advertising and more money on making their OS easier to use, and find a way of removing that piece of crap.... Active X.

Originally posted by beg_ne:Funny how the big bad Microsoft is so afraid to actually use the names of THEIR products in their own commercials.

Wait... You clearly identified the commercial to be a Microsoft ad, yet you are complaining that the ads aren't bringing up Microsoft?

quote:

Originally posted by beg_ne:Instead they rely on selling other people products (HP) and on causing a controversy with a competitor with much smaller marketshare to gain notoriety for their ads.

You may have a problem understanding commercials because the iPhone ads are all about showcasing 3rd party apps from Facebook or Google in order to sell iPhones.

When products are that closely related then even the dopiest of tv viewers can figure out that you need an iPhone to run iPhone apps, you need a Windows computer to run Windows and you need hair to use shampoo.

Originally posted by Urkel:Solution (Mom): I want to move her to Mac but the CHEAPEST 15" is $2000?!?! 13" is too small and 17" is a whopping $2700 so I simply can't justify that much for an email/internet portal. $800 Dell. (No warranty because all my "crappy" Dells have lasted over 3yrs)

I would agree with you that Apple has big gaps in their ranges, but you're aware that the Dells 15" screen is 1366x768 and the Apple 15" is 1440x900, right? There's a reason companies can get away with selling big screens for cheap. Basically you are getting a screen with the same resolution as a 13.3" but bigger.

I suspect the Macbook also has a higher quality screen in it since Apple seems to like doing that with the higher end of their range.

Originally posted by Kanuck:And so now, every time people see a Windows ad, they're reminded that Macs are a legitimate alternative.

Just as the "I'm a Mac" ads reminded people that PC's are better.

Huh? I think you misunderstand.

To mention your competitor in an ad tells the viewer that the competitor is legitimate. To avoid your competitor tells the viewer that they aren't even worth mentioning.

So Apple doesn't mention Samsung, Palm, Sony, Creative, etc in their ads. In that sense no comparison is ever made and the user is left with no alternatives except an iPod or iPhone.

When Apple mentions PCs, however, they do so as an underdog: They have 9% marketshare now in the US, but when they first started the ads they were closer to 4%. They literally have nothing to lose by mentioning Windows.

So in the position of power (like iPods or iPhones), Microsoft is best left not mentioning Apple; doing so reminds the user that, "Hey, there is an alternative". So instead of people thinking "Apple is a niche player", they are reminded, "They are Microsoft's equal". A company with 90% marketshare competing with a company that has 9% marketshare. Microsoft has everything to lose in that comparison and nothing to gain.

I mean, really, are these ads going to steal sales from Apple? Or is it more likely that it will convince people who are willing to spend more money (they exist, witness the Dell Adamo, HP Envy, Sony Vaio, etc), that Apple is legitimate?

So exactly who are these ads supposed to target? All it seems to be doing is getting some Mac users up in arms, and some PC users with ignorant ammo that reaffirms their point of view that PCs are "superior" because, umm, they're cheaper. Or something.

Or is it meant to target fence-sitters? Surely though, people who are fence-sitting are interested in more than just price? There's a difference in the OS and ecosystem as well, for obvious starters, and people will prefer one, the other or both. Or something else, like Linux.

I'd say there's definitely evidence of a reversal, but there's no way it will turn into OS X dominance, largely because the dominance of one system, whether it's Windows or the iPod is an aberration that the market will eventually correct.

The 'mistake' is to presume that markets react immediately, rather than it taking years for a monopoly to be unwound.

But yeah, in this particular case, a straight battery-life comparison is the biggest difference, and a huge one.

The other thing is that MS seem to be forgetting that their big success came from business IT, and there's a risk that - as with Vista - they seem to be taking corporate IT for granted / focusing too hard on the home.

But for now, I guess they can afford to be complacent - no one out there is offering a better proposition to businesses.